50mm 1:1.8 vs 50mm 1:1.4

TheCanonMan · Sep 7, 2005

what i would like to know is what is the better lens the 50mm 1:1.8 or the 50mm 1:1.4 i have both i like the 1:1.4 more but i dont know what is a better lens for every day use

by the way what is the 1:1.4 1:5.6 ext. stand for is the smaller the number better or is the bigger the number better ?

thebeginning · Sep 7, 2005

well, i dont see how your title has anything to do with your question, but generally the smaller that 1

?) number is, the better. I'm most likely going to get flamed for saying that, as it is not always the case, like with long telephotos (canon's 400 5.6L lens is a gem, for instance), but for this instance i'll just say it. as for what that 1:5.6 and 1:1.4 is, check here, it should help you out: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3028

basically, lenses with larger max apertures (under f2.8 is considered large) cost more money to make, so the manufacturers go into more trouble to make good optical quality glass in them. this isnt ALWAYS the case, like I said, but generally it is.

on the topic of the 50mm 1.4 vs. the 50mm 1.8, here's a helpful review: http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

TheCanonMan · Sep 7, 2005

thanks for the info

lazarus219 · Sep 8, 2005

The 1.4 is going to be alot faster, but for everyday shooting, you donty really need that speed, also- your depth of field all the way down at 1.4 is going to extremely shallow, so you might not be able to use that ultra-wide aperture alot of the time anyways, but at night, those extra aperture stops are going to keep you shooting handheld for much longer

HoboSyke · Sep 8, 2005

I reckin get the 1.4 lens. Apparently its a lot better made as well..

Xmetal · Sep 8, 2005

HoboSyke said:
I reckin get the 1.4 lens. Apparently its a lot better made as well..

F1.4 has USM.

F1.8 doesn't. :meh:

TheCanonMan · Sep 8, 2005

i have both lol i have 2 1:1.4's and 5 1:1.8's lol i save junk any one know what the S.S.C. on the 1:1.4 stands for ?

Hertz van Rental · Sep 8, 2005

lazarus219 said:
The 1.4 is going to be alot faster

Not really. The difference between 1.8 and 1.4 is less than 1 stop - in fact it's only 2/3rds of a stop so it's not going to give you much of a speed increase.

HoboSyke · Sep 8, 2005

I still think the 1.4 is better after reading this review
http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

Hertz van Rental · Sep 8, 2005

If you check out the price difference - leaving aside the review - it becomes obvious that the 1.8 was designed as a budget lens. The 1.4 is the 'quality' lens. On this basis alone you would expect the 1.4 to perform better - and it does.

westman · Sep 8, 2005

i've tried Nikkor AIS 50 1.4 and AF 501.8
both very good quility and sharp, i think it just depends on the things u want to archive , if u have that moeny buy 1.4, the dof is amazing

ksmattfish · Sep 8, 2005

I'd confidently do a shoot-out with my cheapo Canon 50mm f/1.8 mkII vs. the f/1.4 any day.

The f/1.8 mkII is plasticky and doesn't have the bells and whistles; someone mentioned USM, it also probably has a DOF scale, which the f/1.8 doesn't (cheap bastards at Canon!). But it's unlikely that you would be able to spot the difference in photos taken with the two. If money is no object, go for for the f/1.4 (or the f/1.8 mkI) ; it is definately a better built lens, but it won't take better photos than the f/1.8.

For my Nikon FM2n I have both the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 (expensive) and the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 (cheap). Comparing the two lenses the f/1.8 is sharper at f/2 than the f/1.4 at f/2, so more money doesn't always mean a better lens.

EDIT: By the way, it seems like this question has been posted about 4 times in the last week. Let's do a little searching, folks.

thebeginning · Sep 8, 2005

hertz is right on both accounts. the speed is good on the 1.4, but not a whole lot faster than the 1.8, and the 1.8 WAS supposed to be more of a budget lens. so it really just depends on you.